get_command_templates

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral transparency. It explains what command templates are and that it retrieves from global space and projects, which is useful context. However, it doesn't disclose potential side effects, pagination behavior, or response limits, though the presence of an output schema mitigates some uncertainty.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, with the first sentence front-loading the primary action and the second providing a concise definition of command templates. Every word contributes meaning without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple zero-parameter getter with an output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, the resource it targets, and the scope of results. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the description isn't required to explain parameter syntax. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description adds context about the resource type and scope, which is more than sufficient.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Get all command templates') and the resource ('command templates from Itential Platform'). It also specifies the scope (global space and projects), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_templates' that might refer to other template types.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool: to retrieve all command templates from both global and project scopes. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the 'Get all' wording and resource definition make the intended use case evident.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.